Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
1/25/2018 7:38:29 AM
Posted: 9/1/2001 11:11:48 AM EST
Officer indicted in dog's death By Brent Whiting The Arizona Republic Sept. 01, 2001 A Surprise police officer who shot a neighbor's dog has been indicted by a Maricopa County grand jury. William E. Porter, who is battling to keep his job, was charged with disorderly conduct, a felony, and cruelty to animals, a misdemeanor, in an indictment returned Aug. 22. Porter, who is free without bail, is scheduled for arraignment Wednesday in Maricopa County Superior Court. Porter, a six-year member of the Surprise force, has an unlisted phone number and could not be reached for comment. The defendant, who lives in a rural area in the far West Valley, is accused of taking a shotgun and firing on the dog after it crossed into his yard June 8. Sheriff's deputies said the dog's owner shot the dying animal to put it out of its misery. Porter, who was placed on paid leave after the shooting, was served by the city Aug. 7 with a notice of intent to terminate his police employment. Porter has appealed and the case is expected to go to arbitration, said Lt. Mark Schott, a Surprise police spokesman. There is no indication when a final decision might be made
View Quote
If the dog was on his property, why is he being indited? What on earth is going on here- this guy is about to loose his job over something that should have never gone to any court.
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 11:16:31 AM EST
A civilian would have faced the same charges, it is called equal protection under the law. The grand jury was correct.
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 11:23:33 AM EST
We need more facts on this. [b]Unless that dog was endangering someone. He should lose his job.[/b]
As posted by:ArmdLbrl If the dog was on his property, why is he being indicted? What on earth is going on here- this guy is about to loose his job over something that should have never gone to any court.
View Quote
Unless you have some more facts on this case, That's a pretty darn stupid statement on your part.
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 12:59:00 PM EST
It was his private residence- the dog was tresspassing. It is the dog owners responsibility to keep control of his or her animal. What the fuck happened to private property rights?
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 1:07:05 PM EST
If I (a non-LEO) shot my neighbor's dog with a shotgun because it came into my property I would be facing some serious charges too unless that dog was endangering someone in immediate area.
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 1:35:29 PM EST
Strange dogs running loose are [i]de facto[/i] dangerous to other people and other peoples pets, with exceptions only to toy size dogs. If its coyote size or larger and its not in control and you dont know it personally it is a threat. Especially if they are large breeds like German Shephards, Rottwilers and Bull Terriers. My father and I here on our property dont make distinctions between domestics and coyotes if they are posing a threat to our own dogs and cats. And we have neighbors with horses, sheep, and llamas who would do the same thing. Unless this turns out to be he shot a toy poodle for shitting on his lawn then this is bogus and a waste of taxpayers money.
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 1:41:45 PM EST
Man here we go again, LEO bashing in progress, we haven't even heard the story from the point of view of the officer in question. I am sure he had a good reason to shoot, its just a media conspiracy to make him look vicious! If he gets the same jury as the pooch shooter in Minnesota got, then there would be no doubt as to the outcome. But just in case all the cop has to do is say that it was a LEO-Bashing dog and the case is his. rDAm
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 2:05:35 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/1/2001 2:10:47 PM EST by prk]
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: ...posing a threat to our own dogs and cats....
View Quote
This is the key. A strange dog may have the potential to be dangerous, but if it's NOT actually posing a threat, you can run it off, try to have it removed, or call the owner if you recorgnize it, but you can NOT blow it away. A water hose, irritant, or other less-than-lethal method should be tried first. Only when it is actually attacking or seriously acting like it's going to, can you justify shooting a 'trespassing' dog. I put that word in quotes, because as you may know, DOG law is different from MAN law, plus not many dogs can read trespassing signs. Maybe you should learn and post some more facts about the case before finally making up your mind. Suppose you learned that the guy had a record of incidents of excessive force or animal cruelty. You might feel kinda dumb for going to bat for him without having enough facts. On the other hand, if it turned out the the dog was trying to bite the kids orsomething, then I'd agree with you. When I lived in the sticks, out neighbors' dogs would often show up at our place and it was no big deal - we all knew each other and had a lot of tolerance for this kind of thing, as long as no livestock or chickens were harmed. Our dog was no different from theirs. Ask your neighbors if they would shoot your dog at their place if he was not attacking.
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 2:14:16 PM EST
I agree, there is more info needed. Offing a dog simply because it is loose is hardly a smart thing to do(why discharge a firearm if not necessary, there is some human decency that goes into that as well. We have always kept close tabs on our dogs. We have had several BIG german shepards. All of them, and I mean all of them were the friendliest dogs in the world unless we were attacked. We had a dog that learned how to work the latch on the gate. He got out twice before we realized what the problem was. Both times our neighbor called us to let us know, and we solved the problem immediately. Had someone shot my dog, that was not threatening anyone, simply because it got out and was doing some quick exploring, I'd probably look into pressing charges as well. Granted if the dog were attempting to harm someone, I'd shoot it myself. But comeon, shooting a dog for tresspassing? What about the meter reader?, was he tresspassing too!?!
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 3:53:31 PM EST
[Last Edit: 9/1/2001 3:54:25 PM EST by reddobie]
Originally Posted By ArmdLbrl: If the dog was on his property, why is he being indited? What on earth is going on here- this guy is about to loose his job over something that should have never gone to any court.
View Quote
Do you have the right to shoot a human or your neighbor's child for trespassing. Then why would you shoot a dog for trespassing. If the dog was attacking some one, that's something different. And yes it may have been a large breed dog, but the neighbor's kid may have a gun on them. You better be able to show that the the dog or person attacked someone and that you feared for you life.
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 4:36:00 PM EST
Ain't it a crying shame that LE has to follow the same rules as the rest of us serfs!
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 5:58:07 PM EST
Who knows, Maybe he knew the dog and it came over everyday, or maybe not. Was it a Yorkie, or what? When the neighbors dogs come in my yard I dont shoot them. What are they going to do, justify it by calling it "yard rage" Like "air rage" and "road rage". It needs to be called people who are not fit to be in scociety & jail them. People have no responsibility era today. GG
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 6:09:25 PM EST
If the rural area he lives in has a law against discharging a firearm then he has violated the law. Does he deserve to go to jail??? thats up to a court to decide. that is the american justice system that im sure this office understands.
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 9:42:40 PM EST
I think the Officer should be tried for Murder in State Court and for violating the Dog's Civil Rights in Federal Court
Link Posted: 9/1/2001 10:20:37 PM EST
A few weeks ago, ome of my neighbors had their dog get off it's chain somehow. The dog is an American Boxer, which is NOT a small dog. But he is not a vicious dog either. When I came home from work, it was raining and I tried to catch him for about 10 minuets. Once when I grabbed his collar, he put his jaws on me, more in a playful way than anything, but it startled me, so I let him go. An hour later, another neighbor, who knows the dog owner better than I do, came home and tried to catch the dog. No luck. I even tried to luer him in with some sausage. Finally, some jackass down the street called PMO to catch the dog. The PMO dogcatcher couldn't catch him, but I finally did after he boxed himself in in a fenced in yard. What pissed me off about the PMO guy was that he told my neighbor, who happened to be in his car, TO HIT THE DOG!!! Well, needless to say I chewed his ass for it, ant the owner changed the latch on his collar t oa locking ring, instead of the carbiner that was on there. The dog, who is named Smokey, plays with the kids when they are out and is VERY friedly, but he "looks" mean, as doo all boxers. So, to make my point, if this cop shot the dog JUST because it was in his yard, and he KNEW it belonged to his neighbor, he should be put on trial. However, if the dog was, or had a history of being a threat, then he was doing his civic duty, to serve and protect.
Link Posted: 9/2/2001 4:55:04 AM EST
Dogs can't read, if the dog was aggressive itwould be different. We had sililar incidets happen here, but the dogs were attacking.In NJ if it is off the lead the ownerr is guilty
Link Posted: 9/2/2001 7:29:25 AM EST
Dogs go by their own rules: [url]http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?id=48706[/url]
Link Posted: 9/2/2001 7:45:45 AM EST
I can't believe it.... for once I agree with Imbroglio....
Link Posted: 9/2/2001 8:00:59 AM EST
Originally Posted By Imbroglio: A civilian would have faced the same charges, it is called equal protection under the law. The grand jury was correct.
View Quote
Top Top